GNOME 3.8 Release Candidate Now Available
Phoronix: GNOME 3.8 Release Candidate Now Available
GNOME 3.7.92 has been released, a.k.a. the release candidate for GNOME 3.8...
I tried gnome 3 the other day for the first time, in virtualbox, and I gotta say I don't hate it. It isn't my cup of tea and I find it relatively slow to work with on a desktop but I think it makes a very nice tablet DE. What bothers me most about it is how it seems to be equally as restricting as a jailbroken iOS, and I don't like how fallback mode is now removed. I also think shading should be enabled by default, since you can't minimize anything.
However, considering GNOME 3's hardware demands and the fact it isn't practical outside of casual PC/tablet usage, I do not think it should qualify as the linux default anymore. I strongly feel XFCE should take the new title of linux default, considering how balanced it is in usability, performance, compatibility, and features.
I think the reason GNOME 3 is hated so much is because it isn't really GNOME anymore, just as how Windows 8 doesn't feel like Windows anymore. I'm sure there'd be a lot less hate for GNOME 3 if it had a completely different name, and if it didn't lack so many features that even Windows 95 would have.
Gnome 3.8. The version at which gnome died. Since there is no more fallback gnome will see another decline in user numbers.
I'm not sure if there would be a decline. I don't see the appeal of Gnome 3 without using it's standard interface, otherwise you might as well use XFCE or Cinnamon where you get basically the same experience but with more customization. Besides, it isn't necessarily a bad thing that gnome is removing fallback mode because it helps get people with the ancient crappy hardware to move on. As I see it, pretty much any 64 bit compatible (x86) system should be capable of running GNOME 3 just fine, with the exception of VIA users. You could argue that fallback mode would be necessary if your GPU drivers fail, but IIRC, LLVM is supposed to be a quick temporary fix for that. When I tried GNOME 3 I didn't have the GPU drivers installed and it was running relatively smooth; it was usable, I'll put it that way.
Originally Posted by BO$$
A few hours ago I gave Gnome 3 another spin... and now I'm back to KDE.
The performance of Gnome 3 is unacceptable on my Laptop, it kind of "lags" when moving windows (enough to consider it a nuisance). Gnome "classic" seemed to have the same problem, and it felt very very incomplete to me.
Is Gnome "classic" fallback mode?
Anyhow, I can't wait for Gnome 4 .
Last edited by j2723; 03-21-2013 at 03:58 PM.
There's no longer a 2d "fallback mode". In gnome 3.8, "gnome classic" is gnome-shell with a more "classic" gnome2-like layout, but its still gnome-shell and needs 3d acceleration.
Originally Posted by j2723
What kind of hardware are you running? I use Shell (via current Fedora) on my crappy five-year-old netbook, and it's responsive enough. I mean it's not exactly snappy - nothing is on that hardware - but it's certainly usable enough...
Originally Posted by j2723
(Edit: the netbook runs some crappy-but-open intel graphics chip... not the binary-only Paulsbo)
Last edited by Delgarde; 03-21-2013 at 07:00 PM.
But in the contrary, is not bad as a desktop DE and is very keyboard friendly so you cant work without touching to mouch the mouse (more fast).
EDIT: there is no fallback mode, but there is a 'classic mode' with maintained core classic extensions.
I hate uninformed opinion stated as fact. GNOME SHELL IS TERRIBLE IN TABLET USAGE. My gf has an X230T, runs GS, and using it with only the touchscreen is a HORRIBLE experience. For one thing, there is massive input lag (part of the problem seems to be X itself with how it understands edges of the screen, but I think the driver also simply uses low sampling rates). For another, the keyboard is terrible (certainly not helped by the input lag, but there are other problems). The hot corner doesn't work at all with touch. So, you have to careful press the activities button. W8 really got this right with their edge gestures, IMHO. Then again, Windows has actual, trained UX people (sorry, but I really get annoyed by the Gnome team's unwilingness to accept input from people who have expertise in that area, but that's all I'm going to say about this). Likewise, since so much shell functionality exists on the edges of the screen you have similar problems with the rest. Oh, and the messaging tray is pretty much completely inaccessible unless you either: 1. go to the overview first, or, 2. use a keyboard.
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
Much of the problems lie with the lack of gesture support. That was something that should've been CLEARLY mapped out years ago (not coded, mind you, but the UX should've been clearly framed, whiteboarded, and workflowed).
So, please, no more of this GS is for tablets. Casual usage I grant, though that doesn't mean you can't get real work done, simply that it doesn't help you with said work except in relatively special cases (where only a few apps are needed, and concurrent research isn't necessary).
GS is very much Gnome, IMHO. It is Gnome to the Nth, in CONCEPT, but it is fairly poorly managed and executed (oh, don't get me started on their inability to sketch out extension points...Drupal has done this for years, and that is why it has been so successful, IMHO).
However, I very much like the original design doc for G3, and JS/CSS as the primary development targets (at a high level), with the strong C underpinnings (I also like glib). So, I think there is a really nice base there, but the shell needs nearly a complete redesign and rewrite (I'd also start targeting asm.js with emscripten, but you'd need a JS frontend for LLVM).
Mutter itself, BTW, I think is quite good. Owen Taylor has written a surprisingly performant WM that is also pretty lightweight (seriously, try it without running GS).
I wanted to second this. Though I no longer own the netbook, I used to run very early GS (from around 2009-2010) on a first gen netbook and it worked really well. It would drop frames, but it wasn't particularly laggy (well, no more so than linux desktops in general).
Originally Posted by Delgarde
Last edited by liam; 03-21-2013 at 08:12 PM.
Very much a question of good drivers, I guess. Given well-written drivers like the Intel ones, Shell works okay on even crappy old netbook hardware. And it works fine for me on the onboard AMD graphics (a Radeon 4000 series chip) on my current desktop machine, using the open drivers. I'd be interested in knowing what hardware/drivers people are using and having issues with Shell performance...
Originally Posted by liam